The Portland daily press., 1887-11-23
mILLIKEN VS.. PITCHER.
The Evidence In and Arguments In
Progress.

"he Milliken-Pitcher case was continued
yesterday at 3 p. m. in the Municipal Court.
Mr.. w. III. Milliken, senior member of the
firm of w. H. Miiliken & Co.. for the prose-
cution, was the first witness. He testified
that Mr.. Pitcher, the respondent, had been
sick during the past.year, that he left off
work In June. 1885, and came back in Sep
TENDER, but remained only short time. Mr..
Pitcher came to the store in January, 1887,
and remained few days and then went
home. He reported about the middle of
March for work and soon went on the road.
Mr. Milliken testified that he discovered,
sometime in July. that Mr.. Pitcher had been
credited with too much money, that he had
been drawing salary since January first The
book-keeper was asked how it occurred and
replied that he understood that the respon-
dent should draw salary from January LIST.
Witness called the respondents attention
to the fact that he had been drawing salary
from January island told him that it was not
right. The respondent said that he UNDER
stood that 1t was the agreement that he
should draw salary during that time and if
1t wasn't right he would make it right
Mr.. Milliken testified that he ordered the
Dook-keeper to charge back to the respon-
dent two and one-half months salary; that
their statesmen were ordered to report COL
lection whenever one was made; that on re-
turn to the store the statesmen should settle
accounts the first thing and that they were
never authorized to overdraw accounts to
pay expenses; that the respondent had
told him. Mr.. Milliken, that he had taken
money to pay bills but would settle with
the firm, and that when the respondent was
discharged from the service Of the firm, he
said that he would pay the money and never
mentioned 1t at the time that the money was
due him for wages as salesman. Statesmen
have overdrawn their salary. without the
consent of the firm. ten dollars and some
times more. Mr.. Pitcher was never all
lowed to overdraw his salary without his,
Mr.. Millken's, consent. The witness
d d not remember of having said to the re-
spondent that he might draw salary from the
first of January.
Mr.. Geo. Pitcher, the respondent, was the
next witness called, and he testified that he
had been in the employ of Deering. Milliken
& Co.. four years and nine months, and that
he Travelled mostly ON the Grand Trunk road,
this side of the Canada line. He said that
his account had been oyerdrawn at times,
once, when he bought property In Bethel, to
the extent Of $500 or $500, but that the firm
was aware of the fact. He testified that he
collected money of Twitchell q Goodrich
October 18th, and did not report it. The col
lection was not reported at once because, in
stead of returning to the city as he usually
did he went to Vermont to sell goods when
he returned from Vermont he had many or
ders to fill and in his haste the account was
overlooked. He did not know that he had
money belonging to the firm that had not
been accounted for, and at later date when
he discovered that he had overlooked the col
lection of the money from Twitchell 81 Good
rich he reported it to w. III. Milliken d Co.
He testified that he was taken sick in January
was sick in bed for some time; that later he
went to the store, but was too weak to work.
and the doctor advised him not to 60 to work
until he was stronger. and that Mr.. w. ID. Nil
liken, ST., said to him that January and Feb
ruary we're dull months and told him he had
better 60 home, which he did. He returned to
the store In March and soon went on the road.
He testified that Mr.. Milliken agreed that he
should draw salary from. Jan. LIST, and or
which was done. When Mr. Milliken found
that he, the respondent, had drawn salary
from the first OF the year, he asked him why
he did so, and he answered that he claimed
it as his due. Mr.. Pitcher testified that
back. he spoke to Mr.. Clark, the bookkeeper,
about it, and Mr.. Clark said that he thought
it would be all right for him to continue on
the road, and Mr.. Milliken would make it all
right with him. He didn't remember that
he ever said that he would pay back the
money; was in the habit of mixing his own
money with that of the firm, which he car
ried in his pocket-book. Mr.. Milliken said
to him that he was owing the firm some
money and that he would like to have him
settle. He said, very well. Soon after be-
ing discharged, he consulted an attorney,
and with him he figured what was due the
firm, and drew check for that amount for
the firm.
Mr.. Nathan Cleaves was the next witness
called. He testified that Mr.. Pitcher had
consulted him in regard to his right to draw
salary from January to March and that he,
Mr.. Cleaves, said that he regarded that mat
ter as settled thing and that it took two
to make contract and that the contract
could not be broken in such a case without
the consent of both parties. MIR. Pitcher
wanted to know what he should do and he,
Mr.. Cleaves, told him to retain all that was
due him from the firm and to pay the rest.
MI. Pitcher did as advised.
At this point the evidence closed and the
arguments for the defence, by Mr.. Cleaves,
followed and the argument for the prosecu-
ton by Mr.. Libby was begun but not finish
ed. The case will be continued this MORN